Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1077
| From | Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) |
| Date | 2014-01-10 09:11 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <14-01-010@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <13-11-025@comp.compilers> <14-01-007@comp.compilers> <14-01-008@comp.compilers> |
On 1/8/2014 10:21 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2014-01-08, Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> wrote: >> On 11/20/2013 2:29 AM, Martin Ward wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> (2) CPU designers may choose to implement that behaviour in hardware >>> on the next iteration of the CPU. Now the programs run fast on *all* >>> CPUs. >>> >>> Everybody wins. >> >> I am such a CPU designer. We faced the "undefined" issue in our Mill >> family of general-purpose CPUs (ootbcomp.com). Not only are languages >> under-constraining, they are also sometimes over-constraining: signed >> integer overflow is undefined in C but required to wrap in Java. > > It's only undefined on paper. In reality, if you don't make it wrap in C like > in Java, unknown numbers of C programs will break, and not all of them doing it > by accident. Or one may say that unknown numbers of C programs are already broken. And the reality is that the program cannot even in practice depend on wrapping; see http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/120, or just Google "signed integer overflow in C".
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2013-11-20 10:29 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.net> - 2013-11-23 01:06 -0600
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-11-24 21:51 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-01-06 19:23 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2013-12-17 23:07 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-01-06 19:32 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> - 2014-01-08 09:02 -0800
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-01-08 18:21 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> - 2014-01-10 09:11 -0800
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-01-10 23:08 +0000
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> - 2014-01-13 12:47 -0800
Re: Implementation dependent behaviour (WAS: Re: Programming language and IDE design) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 14:16 +0000
csiph-web